First my question: Can anyone explain why windows i.e; XP, W2K for an example, connects to a very low signal and firefox browses, while all the linux distros I've tested using an wireless adapter will connect and fetch and IP but firefox will not browse.

VL5.9-SOHO-Preview is my choice for my box. When final comes out I buy SOHO, if it's for sale . I actually got SOHO to connect and fetch an IP. But, firefox did not like the low signal and refused to browse. So I'm typing this on an old box running Windows Mellinnume; how quaint is that Yes it's wireless using the same dongle as the other boxes

I find that I have the opposite situation. Connected via windows is low signal and intermittent dropped signal, VL (once connected) remains constant and moderate signal (bcm43xx). To be completely honest, Zenwalk gives the best connection using the b43 driver (constant and strong connection). I cannot explain why such a difference between the three distros.

First my question: Can anyone explain why windows i.e; XP, W2K for an example, connects to a very low signal and firefox browses, while all the linux distros I've tested using an wireless adapter will connect and fetch and IP but firefox will not browse.

The part about XP and W2K I am not able to answer. Except that some of the implementationsof wireless are reverse engineered.

The firefox problem. This maybe a dns issue, you can test this by checking in a terminal by pinging yahoo.com and then try to ping by yahoo ip address ( 206.190.60.37). If the last does get a responsethen the problem is a dns problem.

I find that I have the opposite situation. Connected via windows is low signal and intermittent dropped signal, VL (once connected) remains constant and moderate signal (bcm43xx). To be completely honest, Zenwalk gives the best connection using the b43 driver (constant and strong connection). I cannot explain why such a difference between the three distros.

First my question: Can anyone explain why windows i.e; XP, W2K for an example, connects to a very low signal and firefox browses, while all the linux distros I've tested using an wireless adapter will connect and fetch and IP but firefox will not browse.

The part about XP and W2K I am not able to answer. Except that some of the implementationsof wireless are reverse engineered.

The firefox problem. This maybe a dns issue, you can test this by checking in a terminal by pinging yahoo.com and then try to ping by yahoo ip address ( 206.190.60.37). If the last does get a responsethen the problem is a dns problem. Issue this command: cat /etc/resolv.conf | grep nameserver

You should expect your router ip address.

Bigpaws

Bigpaws when http://www.yahoo.com or http://yahoo.com or yahoo.com is ping the ping returns unknown host. VLwifi or wifiRad gives' an ip 192.168.1.107 What's up with this? Could a very low signal be the problem, but if the signal is that low, why is an ip assigned.

First my question: Can anyone explain why windows i.e; XP, W2K for an example, connects to a very low signal and firefox browses, while all the linux distros I've tested using an wireless adapter will connect and fetch and IP but firefox will not browse.

The part about XP and W2K I am not able to answer. Except that some of the implementationsof wireless are reverse engineered.

The firefox problem. This maybe a dns issue, you can test this by checking in a terminal by pinging yahoo.com and then try to ping by yahoo ip address ( 206.190.60.37). If the last does get a responsethen the problem is a dns problem.

Issue this command: cat /etc/resolv.conf | grep nameserver

You should expect your router ip address.

Bigpaws

I believe I read someplace where there is no such thing as a dumb question, well possibly this one is, however I'm going to ask it anyway.

Lets say I type the command "cat /etc/resolv.conf | grep nameserver, and then a) no ip is forthcoming identifying a nameserver. What do I do then? b) Does this command actually resolv anything does it fix anything or is the return of the ip the answer?

At 0530 hours today Vector SOHO's seamonkey bloomed forth and browsed on over to Vector Linux Home and then onto the forum. I was able to write a snappy congrats to all you great supporters, but when I clicked send the signal dropped. So here I am on windows typing to let you know success is at hand. I'm convinced the Vector SOHO part of the equation is correct, and I do believe the problem is a weak signal. However, wifiRadar shows a solid blue icon for signal, but nowhere can I find where it tells the percentage of signal strength nor the connection quality. Well anyhoo! I believe complete succcess is at hand.